The study of performance practice tends to be overlooked in the first-half of nineteenth

century. Thus, this article attempts to discuss the principal areas of idiomatic performance
practice in Mozarts time. It uncovers the relationship between Mozarts notation and its
execution. Drawing from treatises and study of Mozarts notation practice, Levin found
some genuinely Mozartean performance methods and some that can be taken with a grain
of salt. He also reveals the mismatch in notation between editors and Mozarts intentions.

Levin divides his article into several sections. He begins stating the dramatic situations in
Mozarts works was unrelated to functions and relationships of the society. Tempo was
crucial for depicting particular emotional situations. Although treatises emphasized on the
importance of steady tempo, tempo could be flexible in several ways and became rubato.
Levin believes that repeats were not purely mechanical as details from Mozarts
compositions indicated that repeats should be played differently.

Editors might have misinterpreted Mozarts placement of dynamics. Mediation might

appear to avoid shifting characters abruptly. In addition, there were conflicts surrounding
articulation. Mozart employed as strokes rather than dots in editions. The use of strokes
showed that musicians were not trained according to norms in their time. Inconsistency of
ties and slurs between parts wasnt Mozarts forgetfulness but a desire to showcase
idiosyncrasies and delicacy. More mistakes in editions were omitting Mozarts
embellishments when returning to principal theme. However, the fact that Mozart
composed in a multi-tiered process gave rise to conflicts and anomalies.

Referencing from Mozarts notational conventions and Trk, principles of improvised

ornamentation and Cadenzas are discussed. Treatises advocated metrical freedom in
cadenzas. Evidences from Mozarts compositions suggested that harmonic stability must
be preserved until the end.

Levin mentioned the differences of instrumentation between Mozarts time and post-
romantic period. This includes development of performance techniques and alternative
expression used. There were controversies surrounding the performance practice of
continuo instruments during the classical period.

The conclusion is that each period has different justified norms regarding how a piece
should be performed. Levin addresses these deviations from decoration to theatrical, from
improvisation as a central element to taking the score literally.